Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Semantics in space systems architectures

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Costs, life cycles, technologies and agreements between stakeholders and organizations make space systems unique with respect to the complexity. A commonly accepted technique to address part of this complexity is to model and to maintain space systems architectures through the life cycle of their space programs. The benefits may range from supporting consistent model definitions and maintenance up to supporting analysis and verification. Space systems architectures have been modeled using UPDM (unified profile for DoDAF And MODAF; a UML profile). In fact, UPDM argues that it provides a clearer understanding of the semantics behind specific views and viewpoints. Nonetheless, while UML defines its semantics imprecisely using plain text and variation points, UPDM does not define any semantics. In this paper, we evaluate an extension of fUML (semantics of a foundational subset for executable UML models) as a semantics for space systems architectures. The extension of fUML as a synchronous language (synchronous fUML) provides a limited, but formally precise and deterministic, form to describe structure and behavior in UML. Through the combination of this semantics with UPDM, a precise language supporting a standardized meta-model emerges for the definition of space systems architectures. At the end, a simplified case study covering the operational view (OV-*) is presented. Our initial results show that synchronous fUML is able to offer a precise and deterministic semantics for UPDM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andre C, Mallet F, Peraldi-Frati MA (2007) A multiform time approach to real-time system modeling. In: International symposium on industrial embedded systems

  2. Benveniste A, Caspi P, Edwards S, Halbwachs N, Le Guernic P, de Simone R (2003) The synchronous languages twelve years later. Proc IEEE 91(1):64–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Benveniste A, Caillaud P, Le Guernic P (2000) Compositionality in dataflow synchronous languages: specification and distributed code generation. In: Inf Comput 163:125–171

  4. Benyahia A, Cuccuru A, Taha S, Terrier F, Boulanger F, Gerard S (2010) Extending the standard execution model of UML for real-time systems. In: IFIP advances in information and communication technology, Australia, pp 43–54

  5. Bordin M, Naks T, Pantel M, Toom A (2012) Compiling heterogeneous models: motivations and challenges. In: Proceedings—embedded real time software and systems, Tolouse, France

  6. Borger E, Stark RF (2003) Abstract state machines: a method for high-level system design and analysis. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. European Cooperation for Space Standardization (ECSS) (2008) Space engineering ground systems and operations monitoring data definition, ECSS-E-ST-70-31C. ESAESTEC, The Netherlands

  8. Forget J, Boniol F, Lesens D, Pagetti C, Pouzet M (2008) Programming languages for hard real-time embedded systems. In: Embedded real time software, France

  9. Hayden LJ, Jeffries A (2012). On using SysML, DoDAF 2.0 and UPDM to model the architecture for the NOAAs joint polar satellite system (JPSS) ground system (GS). In: SpaceOps 2012, 2012, Stockholm. 12th international conference on space operations. AIAA, Stockholm

  10. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (1998) Information technology open distributed processing reference model: overview. ISO/IEC 10746-1

  11. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (1998) Information technology open distributed processing—reference model: architectural semantics. ISO/IEC 10746-4

  12. Ober I, Ober I, Dragomir I, Aboussoror E (2011) UML/SysML semantic tunings. J Innov Syst Softw Eng. Springer, Berlin, pp 257–264

  13. Object Management Group (OMG) (2012) Semantics of a foundational subset for executable UML models: version 1.1 RTF Beta1. http://www.omg.org/spec/FUML/

  14. Object Management Group (OMG) (2012) Systems modeling language: version: 1.3. http://www.omgsysml.org/

  15. Object Management Group (OMG) (2013) Unified profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM): version: 2.1 RTF beta. http://www.omg.org/spec/UPDM/2.1/

  16. Object Management Group (OMG) (2011) Unified modeling language superstructure: version: 2.4.1. OMG, USA. http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.4.1/

  17. Poupart E, Charmeau MC (2012) Modeling space system to provide global coherency from design to operation phases. In: SpaceOps 2012, 2012, Stockholm. 12th international conference on space operations. AIAA, Stockholm

  18. Romero AG (2014) Hybrid fUML—developer’s guide. In: Space technoloy and engineering. National Institute for Space Research, Brazil. http://urlib.net/sid.inpe.br/mtc-m21b/2014/09.22.00.21. Accessed 23 Sept 2014

  19. Romero AG, Workspace hybrid fUML—v 1.0. (2014) Space technoloy and engineering. National Institute for Space Research, Brazil. http://mtc-m21b.sid.inpe.br/rep/sid.inpe.br/mtc-m21b/2014/09.21.22.28. Accessed 23 Sept 2014

  20. Romero AG, Schneider K, Ferreira MGV (2013) Towards the applicability of Alf to model cyber-physical systems. In: International workshop on cyber-physical systems (IWCPS), Krakow, Poland

  21. Romero AG, Schneider K, Ferreira MGV (2014) Integrating UML composite structures and fUML. In: International conference on current trends in theory and practice of computer science (SOFSEM). High Tatras, Slovakia

  22. Shames P, Skipper J (2006) Toward a framework for modeling space systems architectures. In: SpaceOps 2006, 2006, Rome. 9th international conference on space operations. AIAA, Rome

  23. Shames P, Anderson ML, Kowal S, Levesque M, Sindiy OV, Donahue KM, Barnes PD (2012) NASA integrated network monitor and control software architecture. In: SpaceOps 2012, 2012, Stockholm. 12th international conference on space operations. AIAA, Stockholm

  24. The Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) (2008) Reference architecture for space data systems (RASDS), CCSDS 311.0-M-1, CCSDS, Sept 2008

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Brazilian National Institute for Space Research, São José dos Campos, Brazil

    Alessandro Gerlinger Romero & Maurício Gonçalves Vieira Ferreira

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Kaiserslautern, Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Klaus Schneider

Authors
  1. Alessandro Gerlinger Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Klaus Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maurício Gonçalves Vieira Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alessandro Gerlinger Romero.

Additional information

This work was supported by Brazilian Coordination for Enhancement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Romero, A.G., Schneider, K. & Ferreira, M.G.V. Semantics in space systems architectures. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 12, 27–40 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-015-0267-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-015-0267-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation